TRENDING NEWS

POPULAR NEWS

If Only It Was That Simple

Song with the lyrics "I am just a simple man, but if I could only hold your hand"?

Sometimes (I Wish) - Dallas Green

If only life "were" or "was" as simple as....?

The standard correct usage for a hypothetical (contrary-to-fact) situation is "If only life were fair" or "If only I were taller" or ""If only this were easy to do."

The sentences above are in the present. Many speakers use "was" and are understood, but you asked for "correct."

Edit: The adjective used--"fair" vs. "easy" has nothing to do with the choice of verb. "Were" would be correct with a noun, if the subject can never be that noun. Example: If you were a bird....

The only thing that matters is the contrary-to-fact nature of the idea. If it's not factual, it needs the subjunctive, "were." If I were you/If he were here/if it were hot today, etc.

Oh, this is indeed simple. I’d pick chocolate in a heartbeat. Chocolate is extremely versatile, peanut butter isn’t. Chocolate is can range from cheap snack bars to exquisite fine dining desserts. Peanut butter is a product that some people for some inexplicable reason thing goes together with jam.You could remove peanut butter from my diet and I doubt that I’d notice the difference. Remove chocolate, and a fair amount of snacks, desserts, drinks, and even main courses would disappear from my life.

Simple Array question? answer only part C and D?

C) so you mean that for the int array you would have expected it to be multiples of 4, since that's the size of the int and the difference in consecutive pointers should be 4, not 1 (as seen in the output)?

First, for the char array (since it's only 1 byte in length), this is expected behavior. The reason it increments by 1 and not 4 in the int array is because the C compiler knows you are subtracting two int pointers. So if you add one to an int pointer, it should go to the next int in the array, which would mean incrementing by 4 bytes...so if you do pointer subtraction, it's just going to say it differs by one.

If you did the following, you would see the difference of 4 like you expected:

char *firstP = (char *)first;
char *secondP = (char *)(first + idx);// or (char *)(&first[idx]);

Now if you display secondP - firstP, it will give the difference of 4 that you were expecting.

D) You said you already did B), so does it match your formula? I suspect it should.


Edit:

Surely your formula can handle negative numbers, right? You just go backwards, that's all a negative means. Your formula doesn't care whether or not it's a valid index and neither does the compiler when you do that. The only thing that "cares" is the OS and it only "cares" when you go outside of you page of memory (this is what will cause a segfault). Often times, if you only go slightly over the array (and almost always slightly before) this will NOT cause a segfault because you are not outside of the page in memory (so as far as the OS is concerned you are allowed to access this memory). Usually you only get segfaults when you don't initialize a pointer because now the memory will be random and most likely outside of your page in memory.

Old Music Fans only Please (Easy 10 Points)?

5-Billie Jean from the late Michael Jackson (Album: Thriller)
The song's lyrics refer to a real-life experience in 1981, in which a mentally ill female fan claimed that Jackson had fathered one of her twins. The song is well known for its distinctive bass line and Jackson's vocal hiccups.

The Magic & The Madness documents how a young woman wrote a letter to Jackson in 1981, informing the singer that he was the father of one of her twins. Jackson, who regularly received letters of this kind, had never met the woman in question and ignored it. The woman sent more letters to Jackson, claiming that she loved him and wanted to be with him. She wrote of how happy they would be, bringing up the child together. She pondered how Jackson could ignore his own flesh and blood. The letters disturbed the singer to the extent that he suffered nightmares.

Following the letters, Jackson received a parcel containing a photograph of the fan, as well as a letter and a gun. Jackson was horrified—the letter asked that the pop star kill himself on a certain day and at a specific time. The fan would do the same once she had killed their baby. She wrote that if they could not be together in this life, then they would be in the next. To his mother's dismay, Jackson had the photograph framed and hung above the dining room table of their family home. Afterward, the Jacksons discovered that the female fan had been sent to a psychiatric hospital.

The most prevalent way I’ve seen someone referred to as “simple” is that the person is uncomplicated— no drama, no serious psychological aberrations, what-you-see-is-what-you-get. Being around a simple person, thus defined, can be restorative. Many of us tend to analyze even simple situations that could be left without probing. Many tend to explore remote possibilities that are (probabilistically) not worth pursuing. When you spend time with a person who does not exhibit psychologically complex behaviors (including what they say), you can take a break from deep analysis… if you can discipline yourself to do so. In this context, “simple” is actually a compliment.Note also that “simple” is a relative term. If someone likes to talk about who’s first in the national league for a sport and why that team is great or what they made for dinner last night, those are conversations that are not psychologically intense or intellectually complicated. I recently had a conversation with a stranger in which he went into the latest findings in astrophysics and how that inspired him as an entrepreneur, how it affected his self-image. This guy presents as more complex. Is he? I surely don’t know. Maybe beneath that conversation about dinner, there’s a person who also reflects on his self-image and has theories about the relationship between deep-sea aquatic life and the purpose of the universe. He just doesn’t live in that complicated mental world all the time.Just as “simple” can be shorthand for “simple-minded,” it can be shorthand for “what-you-see-is-what-you-get.” This does not mean that the person has no mental depth or no psychological issues; it just means that it’s easy to be around them, that there’s no need to theorize about that person’s possible underlying thought or feeling processes or whether they really mean what they’re saying. You can just be with them.

Only Asians please. Just a simple question?

Your question is not a simple question! Deep psychology is involved.
Not racist but the word Asian is too vague.
Stereotypes are sadly based on some truth.

People would befriend someone like themselves: similar households, feelings, race to feel more secure, to feel included: community. It's not just Asians, but everyone.

Note the fact that Asians live in a monocultural society. For many thousands of years, Asians did not have direct contact with foreigners and when they did, it was out of their will. Even now, foreigners-tourists are unique to their eyes.

I am Korean myself, and I do not feel diginified by the fact that Koreans simply refuse to assimilate and accept other cultures.

Note: http://www.convictcreations.com/culture/southkorea.html

Generally dating a Caucasian would be favored due to "sterotypes". You know what I am saying if you look at the media, daily news, stats, etc. Often most races are known for negavitity, and it's frowned upon to date them lol.

And I think any parent would flip out if their kid got a girl pregnant (lol).

I know a lot of koreans that are mixed and they are generally viewed as unique and accepted well in the community.
Adults might frown upon, but us kids are blind in color :/ BTW, mixed is much more beautiful. Us kids are the future, so adults would have to just deal with it in the future. muhaha.

I do not feel happy for the one sided view of many Koreans and Asians, but how can I blame them? They've been through a lot: historically. You can't change who they are.. They will never listen.. All humans are stubborn. It's also meant to preserve a culture.. It's part of who you are. It's hard to change your self.

Meh, I don't careeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee. I really could care less about the color of the person I'm dating. It's a generation thing. :P

You talk about women in particular. So let me ask you: Do you go for the 'ugly' women? Or for personality?It all sounds a bit hypocritical to me. And that your problem with women has more to do with your personality than your appearance.By the way: There are several studies that show women get far more discriminated / valued for their appearance than men. Ugly' men don't get nearly as much discriminated in the work place than 'ugly' or fat women, who don't get promoted. And in the dating world, women also go for 'ugly' men if they make them laugh and otherwise have a great personality or money. While not really many men go for 'ugly' or 'old' women. So do you realize how easy 'ugly' men have it compared to 'ugly' women?!Yes good looking people often have it easier. Getting advantages and opportunities, gifts that they didn't ask for etc... And probably many don't realise how much easier they have it in life. But many do.And it is only true as long as they are not too good looking, cause then it can backfire. I have an extremely good looking friend. All the guys are after her. Guys approach her all the time. So often that it can get more than annoying, she can't go anywhere without literally getting harassed. And if she doesn't give them time they will call her an arrogant bitch. And even if she gives them time and politely declines, some don't get the hint and are just relentlessly bothering her.So you see, there are advantages and disadvantages to everything. And you don't know easy until you have walked in their shoes. So work with what you have got. Start with your personality.

TRENDING NEWS